In hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the clinical significance of soluble immune checkpoint protein levels as predictors of patient outcomes or therapeutic responses has yet to be defined. This study profiled the baseline levels of sixteen soluble checkpoint proteins and their changes following sorafenib treatment for HCC. Plasma samples were obtained from 53 patients with advanced HCC at baseline, week 1, 2 and 4 of sorafenib treatment and tested the concentrations of 16 soluble checkpoint proteins using multiplexed fluorescent bead-based immunoassays. Multivariate analysis showed high sBTLA levels at baseline were an independent predictor of poor overall survival (p = 0.038). BTLA was highly expressed in T cells and macrophages in peritumoral areas. At week 2, sCD27 levels were decreased compared to baseline. By contrast, the concentrations of most inhibitory proteins, including sBTLA, sLAG-3, sCTLA-4, sPD-1, sCD80, sCD86 and sPD-L1, had significantly increased. The fold-changes of soluble checkpoint receptors and their ligands, including sCTLA-4 with sCD80/sCD86, sPD-1 with sPD-L1; and the foldchanges of sCTLA-4 with sBTLA or sPD-1 were positively correlated. sBTLA may be a good biomarker for predicting overall survival in HCC patients. Sorafenib treatment in patients with advanced HCC revealed dynamic changes of soluble checkpoint protein levels.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors, combined with anti-angiogenic agents or locoregional treatments (e.g., transarterial chemoembolization (TACE)), are expected to become standard-of-care for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We measured the plasma levels of 16 soluble checkpoint proteins using multiplexed fluorescent bead-based immunoassays in patients with HCC who underwent lenvatinib (n = 24) or TACE (n = 22) treatment. In lenvatinib-treated patients, plasma levels of sCD27 (soluble cluster of differentiation 27) decreased (p = 0.040) and levels of sCD40 (p = 0.014) and sTIM-3 (p < 0.001) were increased at Week 1, while levels of sCD27 (p < 0.001) were increased significantly at Weeks 2 through 4. At Week 1 of TACE, in addition to sCD27 (p = 0.028), sCD40 (p < 0.001), and sTIM-3 (soluble T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain–3) (p < 0.001), levels of sHVEM (soluble herpesvirus entry mediator) (p = 0.003), sTLR-2 (soluble Toll-like receptor 2) (p = 0.009), sCD80 (p = 0.036), sCTLA-4 (soluble cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4) (p = 0.005), sGITR (soluble glucocorticoid-induced tumor necrosis factor receptor) (p = 0.030), sGITRL (soluble glucocorticoid-induced TNFR-related ligand) (p = 0.090), and sPD-L1 (soluble programmed death-ligand 1) (p = 0.070) also increased. The fold-changes in soluble checkpoint receptors and their ligands, including sCTLA-4 with sCD80/sCD86 and sPD-1 (soluble programmed cell death domain–1) with sPD-L1 were positively correlated in both the lenvatinib and TACE treatment groups. Our results suggest that there are some limited differences in immunomodulatory effects between anti-angiogenic agents and TACE. Further studies from multicenters may help to identify an effective combination therapy.

Liver fibrosis reflects tissue scarring in the liver due to the accumulation of excessive extracellular matrix in response to chronically persistent liver injury. Hepatocyte cell death can trigger capillarization of liver sinusoidal endothelial cells, stimulation of immune cells including macrophages and Kupffer cells, and activation of hepatic stellate cells (HSCs), resulting in progression of liver fibrosis. Liver cirrhosis is the terminal state of liver fibrosis and is associated with severe complications, such as liver failure, portal hypertension, and liver cancer. Nevertheless, effective therapy for cirrhosis has not yet been established, and liver transplantation is the only radical treatment for severe cases. Studies investigating HSC activation and regulation of collagen production in the liver have made breakthroughs in recent decades that have advanced the knowledge regarding liver fibrosis pathophysiology. In this review, we summarize molecular mechanisms of liver fibrosis and discuss the development of novel anti-fibrotic therapies.

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Lenvatinib has been approved as a systemic therapy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We recently experienced lenvatinib-induced tumor-related hemorrhage in patients with HCC. The full details of tumor-related hemorrhage as a lenvatinib-related adverse event have not been elucidated. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> This was a retrospective single-center study that enrolled consecutive patients treated with lenvatinib for unresectable HCC from April 2018 to February 2020. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Sixty-eight consecutive patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, 5 cases developed intraperitoneal or intratumoral hemorrhages. The patients with hemorrhage had larger tumors (maximum tumor size, 97.5 ± 46.4 and 38.2 ± 28.8 mm, respectively; <i>p</i> = 0.009) than the patients without hemorrhage. The dosing period of lenvatinib (median, 3 and 93 days, respectively; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) and the survival time from initial administration of lenvatinib (median, 77 and 495 days, respectively; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) of the patients with hemorrhage were shorter than those of the patients without hemorrhage. Especially, in 4 cases with large HCCs (maximum tumor diameter was &#x3e;90 mm), tumor hemorrhage with vascular lake-like phenomenon was evident, although most tumor blood flow was suppressed. <b><i>Discussion/Conclusion:</i></b> It becomes clear that lenvatinib treatment brings about tumor-related hemorrhages despite rapid suppression of tumor blood flow. We speculate that lenvatinib quickly blocks the feeding circulation, resulting in tumor hemorrhage by necrosis. Clinicians should pay careful attention to the development of life-threatening hemorrhages when treating large HCCs with lenvatinib.

Preventive or on‐demand nucleos(t)ide analog (NA) therapy can prevent severe hepatitis related to hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV‐R). However, it is unclear if NA can be safely stopped in such patients after cytotoxic therapies or during immunosuppressive therapies. We retrospectively evaluated 133 patients who initiated NA therapy between 2007 and 2018. A total of 103 patients were positive for HBV surface antigen (HBsAg) at baseline, and NA therapy was started before cytotoxic or immunosuppressive therapy (preventive group). Thirty patients with resolved HBV infection were treated with NA therapy after HBV reactivation (on‐demand group). Virological relapse was defined as a serum HBV DNA level >20 IU/ml. NA therapy was stopped in 12 (12%) patients (preventive group), and in 16 (53%) patients (on‐demand group). After the cessation of NA therapy, the cumulative rates of relapse were 36% and 39% at 12 and 24 months, respectively. High levels of HBsAg both at baseline and at the cessation of NA therapy were related to the occurrence of relapse. Relapse did not occur in patients with HBsAg levels <20 IU/ml (preventive group). HBV relapse occurred in five (33%) patients in the on‐demand group. Relapse occurred only in anti‐HBs‐negative patients at the cessation of NA therapy. There were no cases of hepatitis flare after the cessation of NA therapy. HBsAg predicted HBV relapse after the cessation of NA therapy in HBsAg‐positive patients. Anti‐HBs could be a predictive marker for NA therapy cessation in patients with resolved HBV.